FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Francis S. Rotella,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 92-376
Meriden City Manager,
Respondent July 28, 1993
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 12, 1993, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter of complaint dated and filed with the Commission on December 28, 1992, the complainant alleged that the respondent failed to comply with his December 3, 1992 request (hereinafter "December request"), for access to the records containing the criteria, guidelines or standards that the City of Meriden uses to determine indigency (hereinafter "indigency standard").
3. Specifically, the complainant sought access to the record containing the indigency standard in effect on April 20, 1989.
4. By letter dated December 10, 1992 (hereinafter "December letter"), the respondent informed the complainant that the only enunciation of the City of Meriden's (hereinafter "city"), indigency standard was contained in a brief dated October 30, 1989 (hereinafter "brief"), submitted by the Meriden City Manager in the Commission's contested case docket #FIC 89-163, Francis S. Rotella v. City Manager, City of Meriden.
5. A copy of the brief was enclosed with the respondent's December letter to the complainant.
Docket #FIC 92-376 Page 2
6. The complainant acknowledges receipt of the respondent's December letter with a copy of the brief enclosed, and concedes that other than the brief, he is aware of no other public record in the respondent's possession that would contain the indigency standard requested.
7. Nevertheless, the complainant alleges that the December letter and brief were neither responsive to his request, nor timely provided. The complainant also takes issue with the indigency standard as set forth in the brief, and the application of that standard to him.
8. It is found that except for the brief, a copy of which was provided to the complainant, the city has no other written statement of any policy or standard for determining indigency.
9. It is found that although the respondent failed to comply with the complainant's records request within four business days of such request, in accordance with the provisions of 1-21i(a), G.S., it is concluded that under the facts of this case where the respondent replied to, and complied with the complainant's record request on the fifth business day following the request, compliance was "prompt" as required under 1-15 and 1-19, G.S.
10. The issue of whether the respondent's indigency standard was nondiscriminatory and reasonable on its face, and fairly applied to the complainant was fully adjudicated by this Commission in contested case docket #FIC 89-163, Francis S. Rotella v. City Manager, City of Meriden, and is not a proper subject of this complaint.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 28, 1993.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 92-376 Page 3
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
Francis S. Rotella
55 Willow Street
South Tower, Apt. 304-S
Meriden, CT 06450
Meriden City Manager
c/o Atty. Christopher P. Hawkins
Department of Law
142 East Main Street
Meriden, CT 06450
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission